Department for Transport

Level Crossings

Lord Bradshaw: To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they have yet considered the remainder of the Law Commission's recommendations on the reform of level-crossing legislation.

Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon: The Department for Transport is continuing to develop its response to the Law Commission’s recommendations on the reform of level crossing legislation in conjunction with stakeholders. We expect to finalise our deliberations shortly with a view to a consultation on preferred options later this year.

Unmanned Air Vehicles

The Lord Bishop of Bristol: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the need to regulate or license the private drone market in the UK.

Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon: Commercial drone operations already require permissions from the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA). Operators must satisfy the CAA that they can operate safely and are aware of all relevant legislation. Last year the CAA granted approximately 1100 permissions for light-weight, low risk operations. There are charges for new permissions and processing renewals. There are also existing regulations in place that require users of drones to maintain direct, unaided visual contact with their vehicle and to not recklessly or negligently cause or permit an aircraft to endanger any person or property. Guidance on tackling the risks of criminal drone use has been provided to constabularies across the UK. The Department for Transport (DfT) is currently working with the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) to develop consistent, EU-wide safety rules for drones. We have also completed a series of public dialogues ahead of a public consultation which will help to inform a government strategy to be published this year. The consultation will look at a range of options including regulation, registration and licensing options, and the potential for restrictions on purchase and use.

Unmanned Air Vehicles

Lord Laird: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what plans they have for the control of drones flying in UK air space.

Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon: There are existing regulations in place that require users of drones to maintain direct, unaided visual contact with their vehicle and to not recklessly or negligently cause or permit an aircraft to endanger any person or property. Work is underway to better understand the risk posed by flying drones close to commercial planes. Guidance on tackling the risks of criminal drone use has been provided to constabularies across the UK. The Department for Transport (DfT) is currently working with the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) to develop consistent, EU-wide safety rules for drones. We have also completed a series of public dialogues ahead of a public consultation which will help to inform a government strategy to be published this year. The consultation will look at a range of options including regulation, registration and licensing options, and the potential for restrictions on purchase and use. Education of drone users is vital. The DfT is working with the CAA on raising awareness of responsible drone use. This includes the CAA’s ‘Drone Code’ safety awareness campaign, the issuing of safety leaflets at the point of sale, publishing an animated video on their website, and running ‘small UAS’ (Unmanned Aerial Systems) Risk and Hazard workshops with industry as part of the Mid Air Collision Programme.

High Speed 2 Railway Line

Lord Berkeley: To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether the HS2 project intends to use secondary aggregates, and if so, in which types of concrete required for Phase 1 of that project.

Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon: As part of our overall sustainability policy for HS2, we plan to use both secondary and re-cycled aggregates in structures which are designed with concrete. Their use, along with the types of concrete to be used, will be dependent on the specific design characteristics of individual HS2 structures and will be subject to the detailed design process in due course. The design process will also take into account other important sustainable factors such as material availability and logistics.

Aircraft: Air Conditioning

Lord Hoyle: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what action they are taking to ensure that airlines monitor the quality of cabin air.

Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon: Currently there is no evidence to suggest that continuous monitoring of aircraft cabin air would be worthwhile. The Government concluded in 2014, after a research programme on cabin air quality lasting for several years, that an international approach to any further research into the issue would be most appropriate. The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) has launched a programme of research into this issue in 2015. In terms of monitoring individual events, the Civil Aviation Authority’s (CAA) Mandatory Occurrence Reporting Scheme (CAP382) ensures that an event that is considered by crew to be a “safety-related event which endangers or which, if not corrected or addressed, could endanger an aircraft, its occupants or any other person” is reported and investigated.

Transport: Rural Areas

Lord Rosser: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the importance of rural transport services in tackling loneliness amongst (1) young people, (2) the elderly, (3) those suffering from mental ill health, and (4) those suffering from physical ill health.

Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon: The Government recognises the importance of public transport for both the sustainability and independence of communities. Inadequate transport provision is a very real concern and can be a barrier to the wellbeing of all, particularly those living in more isolated areas. Ultimately, however, it is for local authorities, working in partnership with their communities, to identify the right transport solutions that meet the economic and environmental challenges faced in their areas and deliver the greatest benefits for their residents.

Bus Services: Finance

Lord Rosser: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what support they are giving to local authorities to ensure that changes to funding for local bus services do not negatively affect (1) young people, (2) the elderly, (3) those suffering from mental ill health, and (4) those suffering from physical ill health.

Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon: The majority of public funding for local bus services in England is provided by the Department for Communities and Local Government. However, the Department for Transport also provides around £40m of Grant funding directly to English local authorities for this purpose. The Total Transport initiative has also provided around £8m funding for 37 pilot projects exploring how local authorities and other agencies can work together to commission transport services more effectively – including integrating NHS non-emergency patient transport. Authorities should remain mindful of their statutory equality duties, including the Equality Act 2010’s Public Sector Equality Duty, and the effect of proposals on all people with protected characteristics, including those who are disabled.

Roads: Accidents

Baroness Smith of Basildon: To ask Her Majesty’s Government how many people have been killed or seriously injured in road traffic incidents in each of the past five years in (1) Essex, (2) Kent, (3) Sussex, and (4) London.

Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon: The table below gives the number of killed or seriously injured casualties in personal injury road accidents reported to the police in 1) Essex (including Southend and Thurrock unitary authorities), 2) Kent (including Medway unitary authority), 3) East Sussex (including Brighton and Hove unitary authority) and West Sussex and 4) London for 2010 to 2014. Number of killed or seriously injured casualties in reported personal injury road accidents: 2010-2014Year1) Essex2) Kent3) East Sussex3) West Sussex4) LondonKilledSeriousKilledSeriousKilledSeriousKilledSeriousKilledSerious2010527455754729426273461262,7632011417184853531442334221592,6512012456895252318447253951352,8872013396505559520464304081332,1942014387195066518530214611292,041 Data for 2015 will be available in June 2016.

Foreign and Commonwealth Office

EU Countries: British Nationals Abroad

Viscount Waverley: To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether, in the event of the UK leaving the EU, UK citizens living in EU member states will retain all of their rights as UK citizens and will continue to be treated the same as if they were resident in the UK.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns: British citizens living in the EU currently enjoy a range of specific rights to live, to work and to access pensions, health care and public services that are only guaranteed because of EU law. There would be no requirement under EU law for these rights to be maintained if the UK left the EU. Should an agreement be reached to maintain these rights, the expectation must be that this would have to be reciprocated for EU citizens in the UK.

EU Countries: British Nationals Abroad

Viscount Waverley: To ask Her Majesty’s Government in the event of the UK leaving the EU what advice they plan to give to UK citizens who work or live in EU member states related to their legal rights generally, their rights related to UK pensions and to medical care paid for under the NHS social security system, and their right to travel across EU without the need of visas.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns: UK citizens get a range of rights from our membership of the EU. If the UK were to leave the EU, all of these rights would have to be covered in a successor arrangement. If we left the EU without agreeing what would happen to these rights, it would at the very least bring them into serious question, creating difficulty for UK citizens who relied on them.

UK Membership of EU

Lord Pearson of Rannoch: To ask Her Majesty’s Government, with reference to the statement in their pamphlet Why the Government believes that voting to remain in the European Union is the best decision for the UK that "the UK has secured a special status in a reformed EU", how the EU has been reformed beyond their claim that the UK has secured a "special status".

Baroness Anelay of St Johns: The settlement reached in February, as set out in the 22 February 2016 White Paper “The Best of Both Worlds: the United Kingdom’s Special Status in a Reformed European Union,” secures the UK’s objectives for reform. The settlement covers four key areas: economic governance; competitiveness; sovereignty; and welfare and free movement. It gives the UK a special status within the EU, as well as setting the EU as a whole on a path of long-term reform.

Treaties

Lord Butler of Brockwell: To ask Her Majesty’s Government how many treaties to which the UK is a party would have to be renegotiated if the UK were to leave the EU.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns: The process of withdrawing from the EU is untested and would contain numerous elements depending on the outcome of the negotiations with the rest of the EU that would follow a notification that the UK had decided to withdraw from the EU. There is little clarity on how this would work, including the number of treaties to which the UK is a party which would need to be renegotiated as a result. There are, for example, free trade agreements covering 53 markets to which the EU is party, which would need to be considered.

EU Enlargement

Lord Grocott: To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Baroness Anelay of St Johns on 7 March (HL6442), whether they support the application to join the EU of (1) Turkey, (2) Macedonia, (3) Montenegro, (4) Albania, and (5) Serbia.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns: We support all five countries' aspiration to join the EU as an important means to drive reform. Turkey’s accession process remains the most effective mechanism to support continuing reform in Turkey. In the Western Balkans, the prospect of EU membership is helping to build stability and promote cooperation on issues that matter to the UK, including organised crime and illegal migration. The strict conditionality of the enlargement process means that it takes many years for a country to complete accession negotiations, undertake reforms and achieve the progress needed to meet EU membership criteria. Any decision to enlarge the EU requires the unanimous agreement of the governments of all existing Member States and ratification in accordance with each country’s constitutional arrangements. In the case of the UK, under the European Union Act 2011 ratification cannot take place without an Act of Parliament to approve the new accession. We can therefore ensure that our requirements are respected in any future EU enlargement. The UK will insist that controls on free movement cannot be lifted until accession countries’ economies have converged much more closely with existing Member States.

UK Membership of EU: Referendums

Viscount Waverley: To ask Her Majesty’s Government why UK citizens who have been resident in other EU member states for more than 15 years who pay taxes and social security in the UK and are treated as domiciled in the UK have been excluded from voting in the referendum on 23 June.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns: The franchise for the EU referendum is based on the current UK Parliamentary franchise and includes British citizens who have lived overseas for fewer than 15 years and were registered to vote before they left the UK. This means that many overseas voters will be able to participate in the referendum and we are supporting the Electoral Commission in their efforts to encourage as many as possible to register to vote. The Government intends to introduce legislation to scrap the 15 year rule as a permanent change to the Parliamentary franchise in due course.

Bangladesh: Freedom of Expression

Baroness Kennedy of The Shaws: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of freedom of expression in Bangladesh, including the threats of criminal defamation against individual journalists and editors, and whether they will raise any specific concerns with the government of Bangladesh.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns: We believe that a vibrant civil society and free media, able to challenge and hold authority to account, are fundamental to a democratic and economically successful society. We have made clear our concerns about freedom of expression in Bangladesh, most recently in a press statement about the murder of Nazimuddin Samad. In that statement the Parliamentary Under-Secretary for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, my Hon. Friend the Member for Bournemouth East (Mr Ellwood), restated our position that the right to freedom of expression and open debate in Bangladesh must be upheld.

Bangladesh: Freedom of Expression

Baroness Kennedy of The Shaws: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the Bangladesh Law Commission's proposed new law, now entitled Bangladesh Liberation War (Denial, Distortion, Opposition) Crime Law, and its implications for freedom of expression in that country.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns: The proposed new Bangladesh Liberation War (Denial, Distortion, Opposition) Crime Law is in the initial consultation phase. We will continue to watch the development of its provisions closely, raising as appropriate any concerns that might arise.

Bangladesh: War Crimes

Baroness Kennedy of The Shaws: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of whether cases before the International Crimes Tribunal in Bangladesh have been conducted in accordance with international fair trial standards.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns: This Government has made clear its support for Bangladesh’s efforts to bring to justice those accused of atrocities committed during the 1971 War of Independence. However, this must be done in a way that meets appropriate international legal standards. Non-governmental organisations continue to raise concerns about the process and we urged the Bangladeshi government to ensure compliance with these standards during Bangladesh’s second Universal Periodic Review at the UN Human Rights Council in 2013. We continue to emphasise these points in our discussions with the Bangladeshi authorities.

Iraq: Islamic State

The Lord Bishop of Leeds: To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Baroness Anelay of St Johns on 5 April (HL7332), what financial and technical assistance they are providing to the Kurdistan Regional Government in its efforts to document the evidence of mass graves and genocide committed by Daesh.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns: We are aware of reports that mass graves have been discovered in northern Iraq. The relevant authorities in the Kurdistan Regional government (KRG) have not requested us to send forensic teams to investigate these reports, and we have no plans to do so.We condemn in the strongest terms the targeting and persecution of Yezidis, Christians and other communities by Daesh. We continue to urge the Government of Iraq and the KRG to do all it can to ensure the security and rights of all communities in Iraq.

Iraq: International Criminal Court

The Lord Bishop of Leeds: To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Baroness Anelay of St Johns on 5 April (HL7331), what is their assessment of the prospect of the government of Iraq acceding to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns: We are not aware of any information indicating that the Government of Iraq is in the process of acceding to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC).The UK is a strong supporter of the ICC. We offer support to any State that is in the process of ratifying the Rome Statute or needs assistance in adopting the national legislation needed to enact the full implementation of the statute. Whether Iraq chooses to accede to the Rome Statute is a matter for the Government of Iraq.

Occupied Territories: Housing

Baroness Tonge: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what representations they have made to the government of Israel concerning reports that a further 77,000 Jewish settlers are due to be relocated to illegal Israeli settlements around Ramallah.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns: We consistently express our opposition to illegal settlements. On 18 February, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, my hon. Friend the Member for Bournemouth East (Mr Ellwood), raised our concerns about settlements with Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu. Our Embassy in Tel Aviv regularly raises the UK’s strong opposition to illegal construction of settlements with the Israeli authorities, and raised these specific plans on 17 November 2015.

Yemen: Military Intervention

Baroness Tonge: To ask Her Majesty’s Government how they ensure that the government of Saudi Arabia complies with the regulatory regime established under the Export Control Act 2002, in particular in respect of arms used in Yemen and supplied by the UK.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns: The British Government considers each export licence application on a case-by-case basis against the Consolidated EU and National Arms Export Licensing Criteria, taking account of relevant factors at the time of application. The Criteria implement the UK’s obligations under the Export Control Act 2002. This includes an assessment of Criterion 2c (whether there is a clear risk that the proposed exports might be used in the commission of a serious violation of international humanitarian law (IHL)).A licence will not be issued for export of items to any country, including Saudi Arabia, if to do so would be inconsistent with any mandatory provision of the Criteria, including where we assess there is a clear risk that the items might be used in the commission of a serious violation of IHL. The Government is satisfied that extant licences for Saudi Arabia are compliant with the Criteria.

Israel: Palestinians

Baroness Tonge: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what representations they have made to the government of Israel concerning recent power cuts in Gaza, in particular the impact on waste water management and sewage disposal.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns: We have concerns about Gaza's chronic power shortages, which have caused problems with water supply and sewage treatment. While the British Government has not specifically raised the recent power cuts in Gaza with the Israeli government or the Palestinian Authority, officials at our Embassy in Tel Aviv regularly urge the Israeli authorities to ease restrictions on Gaza and to facilitate improvements in energy infrastructure.

Israel: Palestinians

Baroness Tonge: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what representations they have made to the government of Israel regarding the creation of a Bible trail in East Jerusalem that entails demolishing Palestinian homes to make way for it.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns: There has been a significant increase in Israeli demolitions since the start of 2016. While we have not raised this particular issue with government of Israel, we remain deeply concerned by Israel’s approach to demolitions, and regularly raise this with Israeli interlocutors.

Israel: Palestinians

Baroness Tonge: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what representations they are making to the government of Israel in the light of the dawn raid on a currency exchange shop in Ramallah.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns: No representations have been made to the Government of Israel on this issue.

Israel: Palestinians

Lord Hylton: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the deaths of or injuries to Palestinians caused by Israeli forces, and the demolition of Palestinian houses in each month this year; and what assessment they have made of whether the representations they have made to Israel and Palestine are having any effect.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns: According to the Palestinian Red Crescent Society, 8 Palestinians were killed and 758 injured in January, 18 were killed and 491 injured in February, and 20 were killed and 335 injured in March. Some of these deaths and injuries have occurred following attacks on Israeli civilians or security personnel. The British Government remains deeply concerned at the continuation of violence in Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPTs). We urge all sides to de-escalate the tensions and avoid actions that threaten to exacerbate the situation. The Government is also extremely concerned at the large increase in demolitions in the OPTs since the start of 2016, compared to the monthly average in 2015. According to the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs in the OPTs, 85 structures were demolished in January, 237 in February, and 176 in March. Our Embassy in Tel Aviv regularly raises our concerns on demolitions with the Israeli authorities. The effect of these representations has not been assessed.

Bangladesh: Press Freedom

Lord Judd: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what representations they have made to the government of Bangladesh about (1) the arrest of Shafik Rehman on 16 April, and (2) the recent harassment of other journalists in Bangladesh; and what was the outcome of those representations.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns: Consular officials in Dhaka have registered the British Government’s interest in Mr Rehman’s case with the Director, Consular Affairs at the Bangladesh Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) and requested consular access to Mr Rehman. Our High Commissioner in Dhaka raised this case with the MFA’s Director General EU.We have made clear our concerns about freedom of expression in Bangladesh, most recently in a press statement about the murder of Nazimuddin Samad. In that statement the Parliamentary Under-Secretary for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, my Hon. Friend the Member for Bournemouth East (Mr Ellwood), restated the Government’s position that the right to freedom of expression and open debate in Bangladesh must be upheld.

UK Membership of EU

Baroness Bakewell: To ask Her Majesty’s Government which institutions and postholders are prohibited by law from expressing views on the EU referendum and the UK membership of the EU.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns: For the final 28 days ending with the date of the poll, section 125 of the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000 (as applied by the European Union Referendum Act 2015) restricts publication of material giving general information about the referendum, dealing with any issues raised by the question, encouraging voting or putting an argument for or against either answer. The restriction applies to material published by or on behalf of “any Minister of the Crown, government department or local authority”, “the Government of Gibraltar, or any Gibraltar government department” or “any other person or body whose expenses are defrayed wholly or mainly out of public funds or by any local authority.” Specific exception is made for the Electoral Commission, the BBC, Sianel Pedwar Cymru and the Gibraltar Broadcasting Corporation. Section 125 also sets out a number of general exceptions to the restriction, such as the issuing of press notices, and making material available to people in response to specific requests.Under charity law, charities can undertake campaigning, including campaigning at the EU referendum, and political activity where it is in support of their charitable purposes, and where the trustees consider it is in the interests of the charity. When doing so, charities must not engage in any party political activity, and must take care to protect the charity's independence and reputation.

Libya: Military Aid

The Marquess of Lothian: To ask Her Majesty’s Government, in the light of the Foreign Secretary's recent visit to Tripoli, whether they are considering the deployment of ground troops to Libya as part of UK efforts to support the Government of National Accord, and what practical assistance they plan to provide, if any, in terms of training Libya's police, coastguard and military.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns: The Foreign Secretary, my Rt Hon. Friend the Member for Runnymede and Weybridge (Mr Hammond), was clear in his oral Statement to the House of Commons on 19 April that the British Government has no plans to deploy troops to Libya in a combat role. The security agenda must be owned and led by the new Libyan government. The UK, along with international partners, stands ready to respond to requests from the Libyan government for assistance in training the Libyan armed forces, to improve their effectiveness in providing security, and in the fight against Daesh. But any support the UK provides would be in response to a clear request made by the Libyan government. During his visit to Tripoli, the Foreign Secretary agreed with Prime Minister Serraj that we should continue to work closely to establish what those training and technical support requirements are; and what, if any, role the international community can play in helping to meet them.

Afghanistan: Taliban

The Marquess of Lothian: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what action they are taking in response to the Taliban's recent announcement of a spring offensive and warnings of large-scale attacks in Afghanistan.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns: The Taliban’s announcement of a spring offensive is consistent with the insurgency’s pattern of activity and was anticipated by the Afghan authorities. The UK is an integral part of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation's Resolute Support Mission (RSM), which is working to train, assist and advise the Afghan National Security and Defence Forces to meet the challenge posed by an enduring insurgency. Working in close cooperation with the Afghan authorities and RSM, the UK keeps its security under constant review.

Bahrain: Administration of Justice

Lord Hylton: To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they will make an urgent appeal to HM the King of Bahrain for clemency in the cases of Mr Mohamed Ramadan and Mr Hussein Ali Musa.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns: The Government regularly discusses human rights and reform with the Government of Bahrain. Although there has been a de facto moratorium on the use of the death penalty in Bahrain since 2010, we are concerned that a number of individuals have received death sentences since then. The UK’s opposition to the death penalty is well known. The Parliamentary Under-Secretary for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, my Hon. Friend the Member for Bournemouth East (Mr Ellwood), raised the cases of Mr Mohamed Ramadan and Mr Husain Al Moosa with the Bahraini Ambassador to the UK, His Excellency Sheikh Fawaz bin Mohammed Al Khalifa, on 8 March. We continue to monitor these cases closely.

Turkey: Refugees

Lord Hylton: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what representations they are making to the government of Turkey about the recently reported killings by Turkish forces of Syrians, including women and children, attempting to flee into Turkey; whether they will call for compensation to be paid to survivors in those families; and what assessment they have made of whether those killings undermine the principles of the EU's agreement with Turkey about refugees and migrants.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns: We regularly raise with the Government of Turkey issues relating to the management of the border with Syria and the treatment of refugees. We are aware of allegations of civilians being shot trying to cross the border from Syria into Turkey but have seen no evidence to substantiate them. The Office of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees is also unable to confirm these allegations, which have been strongly refuted by the Government of Turkey.

Genocide

Lord Alton of Liverpool: To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they consider that non-judicial bodies such as the European Parliament, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, and the US House of Representatives are competent to make a declaration that a genocide is underway; and whether they consider that the UK Parliament can do so, and if not, why not.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns: The Government believes that recognition of genocide should be a matter for judicial decision. It should be a legal, rather than political determination, decided by judges after consideration of all the evidence available in the context of a credible judicial process. Political pronouncements on whether genocide has occurred, such as the European Parliament resolution, are not legally binding and do not create legal obligations on member states.

Department for Education

Teachers: Qualifications

Baroness Donaghy: To ask Her Majesty’s Government, when considering the form of teacher accreditation to be introduced in place of qualified teacher status, what account they will take of the possibility of integrating academic awards such as the PGCE within the initial training of teachers.

Lord Nash: Our recent White Paper, Educational Excellence Everywhere, announced that we intend to replace the existing qualified teacher status with a new, more challenging accreditation that will be based on the demonstration of effective teaching in the classroom.Teaching is a graduate-level profession; all trainee teachers are required to have a degree or to achieve one as part of their initial training, and we have no plans to change that requirement.There is currently no requirement for qualified teacher status to be accompanied by an additional academic award such as a PGCE, and we do not intend to introduce such a requirement to accompany accreditation in future. We know, however, that many trainee teachers value the award of an academic qualification, and we fully expect that providers of initial teacher training – whether school or university-led – will continue to offer the types of award for which there is demand.The White Paper also set out the importance of on-going professional development for teachers, and we are keen to support the development of continuity between initial training, early-career support, and on-going professional development. The new accreditation, coming at a point following the completion of initial teacher training, will give schools the opportunity to tailor a package that recognises teachers’ achievements and promotes progression.

Teachers: Training

Baroness Donaghy: To ask Her Majesty’s Government to what extent they will take account of (1) value for money, and (2) the impact on established training providers, when they accredit new school-centred initial teacher training providers, as envisaged in the Education and excellence everywhere White Paper.

Lord Nash: It is the Government’s priority to secure the sufficient supply of high quality new teachers to the school system. We are committed to increasing the proportion of Initial Teacher Training (ITT) offered by the best schools, while strengthening both university and school-led teacher training, so that ITT provision is properly configured to deliver the quality and quantity of new teachers that schools need.All accredited ITT providers are required to demonstrate how they will deliver, within the funding available, high quality provision that meets the Teachers’ Standards and is compliant with the Secretary of State’s ITT criteria. In order to secure further value for money, we are expanding school-centred ITT (SCITT) provision with a particular focus on delivering training in priority subjects such as mathematics, physics, chemistry and modern foreign languages, and in areas of the country where recruitment is proving to be most difficult . We will prioritise new SCITT provision that commits to helping meet the supply needs of both the local partnership and the wider national system, such as through multi-academy trusts.In considering the impact on existing provision, we will prioritise and incentivise the growth of new provision in areas of the country which need it most. We will continue to require potential new providers to consider and take account of the local ITT market, and to demonstrate how the proposed new provision will add to existing supply. We will continue to require careful consideration by new providers of the likely financial viability of their proposed provision, and continue to require clear evidence it will be sustainable in the longer term.

Special Educational Needs

Lord Storey: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what funding they have put in place to ensure that the parents of special needs students do not feel that home-schooling is their only option.

Lord Nash: The Government’s intention is to make sure that the education system offers every child or young person with special educational needs the support they need to achieve their full potential. The department allocates funding to meet the special educational needs of children and young people through the dedicated schools grant to local authorities, and equivalent funding to academies. Most of this funding goes to mainstream schools and academies: each local authority’s school funding formula takes into account the characteristics of the schools’ students, enabling schools to provide appropriate support to those who have special educational needs. Additional funding (£5.3 billion in 2016-17) is made available to enable local authorities to meet their responsibilities to secure suitable provision for children and young people with high needs. Most of this funding is allocated to mainstream and special schools.In addition, the department has invested heavily in practical and financial support for implementation of the reforms introduced by the Children and Families Act 2014, including an extra £80 million which is being made available in 2016-17. This includes support to help parents with the new arrangements, to make sure that they know what options are available to them, and can be involved in the assessment of their children’s needs and decisions about the provision to meet those needs. To ensure these new arrangements are working, from May 2016, all local areas (both local authorities and health providers) will be subject to inspection on support and provision for children and young people with special educational needs and/or disaibility by Ofsted and the Care Quality Commission.

Equal Pay

Lord Taylor of Warwick: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what steps they are taking to address the pay gap between women and men with vocational qualifications.

Baroness Williams of Trafford: Whilst girls outperform boys at school, many still do not choose paths that lead to careers in the highest-paying professions. We know that occupational segregation is a cause of the gender pay gap, and the Government is taking action to address this. Eliminating the gender pay gap is a key priority for this government, and that’s why we are encouraging girls to consider a wide range of careers through the independent ‘Your Life’ campaign, and guidance called ‘Your Daughter’s Future’, which helps parents support their daughters’ subject and career choices. Last year 53% of apprenticeships were started by women and the number of women starting apprenticeships in engineering and manufacturing, which carry a significant wage premium, has more than tripled since 2009.

Schools: Counter-terrorism

Lord Taylor of Warwick: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what response they have made to the NUT motion rejecting the Prevent strategy and suggesting that it causes "suspicion in the classroom".

Lord Nash: It is highly disappointing that the NUT conference took this stance towards the Prevent strategy.The Prevent duty is entirely consistent with schools’ existing responsibilities and it is irresponsible to suggest that it requires teachers to spy on pupils or close down discussion in the classroom. Good schools will already have been safeguarding children from extremism and promoting fundamental British values long before the Prevent duty came into force. Schools provide a safe space for debate and play a key role in helping young people develop critical thinking skills, which increases their resilience to a range of risks, including extremism. We have published guidance on the Prevent duty and made a wide range of advice and materials available to schools through our Educate Against Hate website.My officials have met representatives of the NUT to discuss Prevent and we will continue to provide school teachers and leaders with support to keep children safe and build their character and resilience.

Ministry of Justice

Prisons: Ministers of Religion

Lord Scriven: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what action they intend to take in the light of the findings of the review submitted to the Ministry of Justice that reportedly shows that government-appointed prison chaplains have routinely distributed homophobic literature to prisoners.

Lord Faulks: My Rt hon Friend the Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice is considering the recommendations of the review of Extremism.

The Lord Chairman of Committees

Hereditary Peers: By-elections

Lord Steel of Aikwood: To ask the Chairman of Committees what fees were paid, if any, to Electoral Reform Services for conducting each of the last four Hereditary Peers By-elections.

Lord Laming: The table below shows the date of the count of the last four Hereditary Peers By-elections for which invoices have been received and the amount paid to Electoral Reform Services in respect of each. Date of countAmount paid to Electoral Reform Services7 July 2015£95016 September 2015£95020 October 2015£95024 November 2015£950 Amounts are exclusive of VAT. The table does not include a recent by-election in respect of which Electoral Reform Services has provided services but not yet sent an invoice.In addition to the services they provide in administering and supervising by-elections, engaging Electoral Reform Services provides assurance that by-elections conform to good electoral practice.

Ministry of Defence

Army: Training

Lord Touhig: To ask Her Majesty’s Government how many soldiers who enlisted (1) aged under 18 years, and (2) aged 18 years or above, left the army before completing their Phase Two training in each financial year since 2007–08.

Earl Howe: Personnel may leave the Army for a number of reasons, including medical and fitness factors, disciplinary reasons, or voluntary withdrawal. Those who enlist under 18 years of age have a statutory right to discharge from the Armed Forces within six months if they feel they are unsuited to Service life. The number of personnel who left the Army before completing Phase Two training, broken down by over and under 18 years, is shown in the following table: Intake YearAge On IntakeFinancial Year Under 1818+2007-081,7902,3202008-091,5502,2102009-101,3702,4802010-117701,4102011-129901,9602012-136301,6402013-145109702014-154601,270Source: Defence Statistics (Army)Notes/Caveats: The figures are for Regular Army only and therefore exclude Gurkhas, Full Time Reserve Service and Mobilised Reserves. Some soldiers joined more than once and may have left more than once over the period 1st April 2007 to 31st March 2015. These cases have been counted each time they joined. Figures have been rounded to 10 to limit disclosure and ensure confidentiality; numbers ending in "5" have been rounded to the nearest multiple of 20 to prevent systematic bias. Totals and sub-totals have been rounded separately and so may not appear to be the sum of their parts

Armoured Fighting Vehicles

Lord Moonie: To ask Her Majesty’s Government how many Ajax vehicles are to be procured for the British Army; and of those, how many will be assembled in Spain, and how many in Wales.

Earl Howe: The British Army will receive 589 Ajax vehicles which will come in six variants. A total of 100 vehicles will be fully manufactured and assembled in Spain. The hulls for the remaining 489 will be transported to the Merthyr Tydfil facility where they will be combined with constituent parts to make complete vehicles.

Armoured Fighting Vehicles

Lord Campbell of Pittenweem: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what progress they have made in the development of the Ajax-tracked reconnaissance vehicle as part of the Warrior Capability Sustainment Programme.

Earl Howe: The Ajax and the Warrior Capability Sustainment Programme (WCSP) are separate programmes and different vehicles, albeit they share the same 40mm cannon. The Ajax programme is progressing, with the first unmanned firings from the vehicle completed this month. The first vehicles will be delivered to training schools in 2017, with an initial operating capability scheduled for 2020 and full operating capability forecast for 2025. WCSP is currently in the demonstration phase, with prototype vehicles and turrets now in build and live firing trials planned for later in the year.

Burma: Military Aid

Baroness Goudie: To ask Her Majesty’s Government to which battalions Burmese Army soldiers who have received training from the UK belong.

Earl Howe: I refer the noble Baroness to the answer I gave on 10 March 2016 to Question number HL6693, which states that we retain the names and current units of Burmese Army soldiers who receive educational training from the UK. The Burmese Army soldiers who currently attend this training are drawn from the headquarters of the Burmese Army, and are not on battalion duties.



HL6696 - QnA EXTRACT ON Burmese Army
(Word Document, 13.54 KB)

Home Office

Protection of Freedoms Act 2012

Lord Sharkey: To ask Her Majesty’s Government how many applications there have been for the Secretary of State to disregard a conviction under the terms of section 92 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012; how many of those applications (1) have been successful, (2) are still pending resolution, and (3) have been refused; and of those refused, what were the most common reasons for refusal in each calendar year since 1 October 2012 to date.

Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon: The information requested is shown in the following tables: ApplicantsCases TotalTotalAcceptedRejectedIn progress2012 (from 1 October)35381424020138310328750201450711655020155476225402016 (to 20 April)20293251TOTAL242317832331 Some applicants apply for more than one case.Accepted cases Section 121Section 131Military equivalentOlder legislation2012 (from 1 October)113002013127002014213102015020202016 (to 20 April)0300TOTAL47630 1Section 12 and section 13 of the Sexual Offences Act (1956).Rejected cases No records foundPublic lavatory1Non consensualUnder age (16) 2Not eligible3Unrelated42012 (from 1 October)0700314201301841114120145720635201554222392016 (to 20 April)0200023TOTAL10388322152 Where cases are rejected for more than one reason, only one is given in the statistics.1 sexual activity in a public lavatory. The Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 excludes conduct which now would be an offence under section 71 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 2 the current age of consent, 16, is taken 3 Not eligible: offences such a soliciting, indecent exposure etc 4 Unrelated: offences such as shoplifting, assault, benefits fraud etc

Refugees: Syria

Lord Roberts of Llandudno: To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether it is their intention that the 20,000 refugees being brought to the UK before 2020 will be housed in local authority accommodation or hosted by British families.

Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon: The UK has been operating resettlement schemes for many years and we already have established an effective networks to accommodate and support resettled people. We continue to work closely with Local Authorities to ensure infrastructure and support networks are in place for the appropriate care and integration of these refugees. This includes ensuring suitable housing is available for them. The accommodation provided to refugees resettled in the UK under the Syrian VPR programme is likely to be private rented accommodation and will be within existing local housing allowance rates. We are not looking to host Syrian refugees in people's homes.

Refugees: Syria

Lord Roberts of Llandudno: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what is the estimated cost of providing accommodation for the 20,000 refugees to be resettled in the UK before 2020.

Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon: The accommodation provided to refugees resettled in the UK under the Syrian VPR programme is likely to be private rented accommodation and will be within existing local housing allowance rates.The first 12 months of a refugee’s resettlement costs are fully funded by central government using the overseas aid budget. At the Spending Review, the Chancellor announced an estimated £460 million over the spending review period to cover the first 12 months’ costs under the scheme. The costs which can be covered from the aid budget include, for example, any education, housing, medical or social care the refugees might need immediately on arrival.At the Spending Review the Government committed £129 million to assist with local authority costs over years 2-5 of the scheme. This will be allocated on a tariff basis over four years, tapering from £5,000 per person in their second year in the UK, to £1,000 per person in year five.

Refugees: Syria

Lord Roberts of Llandudno: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what consultation process took place with local authorities in preparation for their policy of bringing 20,000 refugees to the UK by 2020.

Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon: We are determined to ensure that no local authority is asked to take more than the local structures are able to cope with. That is why we work closely with local authorities and other partners, including the Local Government Association, to ensure that capacity can be identified and the impact on those taking new cases can be managed in a fair and controlled way.This is a voluntary scheme whereby local authorities sign up to accept refugees on a voluntary basis. We have asked them to think very carefully about whether they have the infrastructure and support networks needed to ensure the appropriate care and integration of these refugees before they make an offer of places to the Resettlement Team.

HM Treasury

Bank Services

Viscount Waverley: To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether, in the event of the UK leaving the EU, the UK would have to leave the EU electronic banking system, the Single Euro Payments Area, by which funds can be transferred across the EU.

Lord O'Neill of Gatley: The paper ‘The process for withdrawing from the European Union’ set out that a vote to leave the EU would be the start, not the end, of a process. It could lead to up to a decade or more of uncertainty. One consideration for the UK Government would be how to avoid regulatory gaps in the UK’s domestic legislative framework once the EU Treaties ceased to apply. This would involve questions over how existing EU law could or should be adopted into domestic law. At the February European Council, the Government negotiated a new settlement, giving the United Kingdom a special status in a reformed European Union. The Government's view is that the UK will be stronger, safer and better off in a reformed EU. In April 2016, HM Treasury published analysis that shows that if the UK leaves the EU, the UK would be permanently poorer. The analysis estimates an annual loss of 6.2% of GDP after 15 years, which is equivalent to £4,300 per UK household. The negative impact to GDP would result in weaker tax receipts, which would be £36 billion a year lower. This is more than a third of the NHS England budget and the equivalent of 8p on the basic rate of income tax. These estimates are based on a central scenario: leaving the EU to negotiate a bilateral trade agreement with Europe, along the lines of that which took Canada seven years to negotiate. Through a range of realistic assumptions, many of them cautious, the HM Treasury analysis produces objective and robust estimates, which are within the range of external studies. A full assessment of the short-term implications of leaving the EU will be published in a further government document.

Cabinet Office

Manufacturing Industries

Baroness Redfern: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what was the manufacturing output in the UK in the last 12 months for which figures are available.

Lord Bridges of Headley: The information requested falls within the responsibility of the UK Statistics Authority. I have asked the Authority to reply.



Referral Letter
(PDF Document, 65.84 KB)

Civil Servants: Training

Lord Hunt of Chesterton: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what is the average training period for graduates newly appointed to the UK civil service, and whether that training includes learning about UK government and history.

Lord Bridges of Headley: The Civil Service graduate programme is known as the Fast Stream and its average training period is up to four years. The Fast Stream core curriculum includes learning about UK Government and history and the central induction for Fast Streamers also has activities relating to this topic. Graduates can also enter the civil service via direct appointment without being part of a formal training scheme. Those who do so have access to a wide range of training options, including how the UK government operates.

Department of Health

Health Services: Reciprocal Arrangements

Viscount Waverley: To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether, in the event of the UK leaving the EU, UK citizens living in EU member states will retain all of their rights to medical treatment in the EU under the existing terms and conditions based on their contributions to the UK NHS social security system.

Lord Prior of Brampton: As set out in the Government’s White Paper: ‘The process for withdrawing from the European Union’, published on 29 February and attached, the withdrawal process is unprecedented. No country has ever used Article 50 – it is untested. There is a great deal of uncertainty about how it would work. United Kingdom citizens currently enjoy a range of specific rights to live, to work and access to pensions, health care and public services that are only guaranteed because of European Union law. If the UK voted to leave the EU, the Government would do all it could to secure a positive outcome for the country, but there would be no requirement under EU law for these rights to be maintained. Should an agreement be reached to maintain these rights, the expectation must be that this would have to be reciprocated for EU citizens in the UK. 



The Process for Withdrawing from EU - White Paper
(PDF Document, 1.75 MB)

Responsibility Deal Alcohol Network

Baroness Hayter of Kentish Town: To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they will give details of progress made by the Alcohol Network of the Public Health Responsibility Deal, including (1) reports on its last meeting, (2) plans for future meetings, and (3) an analysis of the fulfilment made of pledges provided by contributors.

Baroness Hayter of Kentish Town: To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they will give details of progress made by all the networks of the Public Health Responsibility Deal, including future plans and a description of the outcomes obtained.

Lord Prior of Brampton: The action notes and papers from the last alcohol network group meeting, which took place on 5 November 2014 are attached. There are no current plans for any of the Responsibility Deal networks to meet, but the Department continues to engage with key stakeholders in each of these sectors as part of its routine policy activity. On alcohol, 1.3 billion units of alcohol were removed from the market through improving consumer choice of lower alcohol products, exceeding the target two years ahead of schedule. 101 companies pledged to have 80% of their bottles and cans of alcoholic drinks displaying unit content, the previous Chief Medical Officer’s lower-risk guidelines and a warning about drinking when pregnant by the end of 2013. An independent report (2014) found that 79.3% of labels provided all these three elements correctly, with 92.8% providing correct pregnancy information. The pledge was considered to be met. On food, around 75% of the retail market and 65% of major high street restaurants and contract caterers have committed to reduce salt. This includes all the major supermarkets, many big manufacturing brands, restaurant chains and contract caterers. 43 companies, including major retailers, fast food and pubs and caterers, as well as the makers of household-name brands are taking a range of actions to help us to consume fewer calories, including through reducing the sugar content of sugar sweetened beverages. 45 major out of home businesses are currently displaying calories on their menus to help consumers make informed choices when eating outside the home, and account for approximately a quarter of all out of home meals served. 23 businesses agreed to adopt the voluntary United Kingdom front of pack nutrient labelling scheme accounting for two thirds of the market for pre-packed foods and drinks. Employees in a wide range of companies are seeing their health and well-being taken more seriously as more and more organisations (over 500) signed up to the health at work pledges. The focus was on making occupational health more about prevention, as well as looking at improving the management of people with chronic health conditions, the workplace environment, healthier canteen food, encouraging more active travel and helping staff to give up smoking. Over 80 construction firms signed up to the health at work pledges representing over 250,000 employees. Construction is the UK’s largest industry employing 2 million workers, 6% of the entire workforce. It is also the unhealthiest industry. Construction workers are at least 100 times more likely to die from a disease caused or made worse by their work than they are to die from a fatal accident. These diseases are all preventable. This was the first sector-specific health at work pledge. Working behind the scenes and reaching into the heart of communities, many businesses and organisations – around 300 - made pledges to help get more people, of all ages and backgrounds, more active. Through the physical activity workplace pledge, we estimate 1.5 million more people are now supported to be more active than before in their workplaces. On 11 March 2016 the Department let all partners know that they will not need formally to report on the progress of the pledges that they have signed up to by submitting their annual updates this year. The Department has not separately analysed the annual reports submitted by partners to date. This Government has renewed priorities and it is considering how best to work with partners and other stakeholders to deliver those. This includes tackling childhood obesity and wider work on diabetes and prevention. The Department will keep all partners informed of any developments on the Responsibility Deal whilst the Government is considering how it should best work with industry to deliver its new priorities. In the meantime, the Government expects that all partners will want to continue to work towards the commitments they have already made and welcomes the fact that many organisations have continued to announce significant new commitments.   



RDAN meeting 05 November 
(PDF Document, 2.07 MB)

Hepatitis: Drugs

Lord Mancroft: To ask Her Majesty’s Government on which specific NICE guidance NHS England based its decision to restrict access to new treatments for hepatitis C to 10,000 patients in 2016–17.

Lord Prior of Brampton: The planning approach for hepatitis C is set out in the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) Technology Appraisals 363, 364 and 365 which require Operational Delivery Networks to prioritise treatment for patients with the highest unmet clinical need. We understand from NHS England that the figure of 10,000 patients reflects NICE modelling used for its recommendations and published alongside the guidance.

Hepatitis: Drugs

Lord Mancroft: To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether NHS England's decision to treat 10,000 hepatitis C patients represents a cap on the number of patients the NHS can treat in 2016–17.

Lord Prior of Brampton: NHS England’s approach paces the roll-out of hepatitis C treatment in accordance with the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) recommendation for prioritisation and the modelling assumptions which informed the NICE recommendations.

Hepatitis: Drugs

Lord Mancroft: To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether patients who meet the eligibility criteria for NICE-approved medicines for hepatitis C will have access to treatment in line with their rights under the NHS Constitution in 2016–17, even if more than 10,000 patients have already been treated.

Lord Prior of Brampton: NHS England’s approach paces the roll-out of hepatitis C treatment in accordance with the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) recommendation for prioritisation and the modelling assumptions which informed the NICE recommendations. These are in line with patients’ rights under the NHS Constitution.

Hepatitis: Drugs

Lord Mancroft: To ask Her Majesty’s Government on what basis, if any, the NHS Mandate requires that investment in NICE-recommended treatments for hepatitis C be limited to avoid disinvestment in other health services.

Lord Prior of Brampton: The NHS Mandate requires healthcare expenditure to be limited to the resources made available by the government. The range of potential treatments which could improve patients health exceeds the funding made available to the National Health Service, therefore increased investment in one area has an opportunity cost on the ability to invest in other areas. NHS England is investing in the rollout of Hepatitis C treatment in full accordance with National Institute of Health and Care Excellence guidance, with an expected doubling of the number of patients benefiting from new treatment to 10,000s in the coming year.

Hepatitis: Drugs

Lord Mancroft: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what is the breakdown of the patient treatment capacity for each Operational Delivery Network for hepatitis C, broken down by hub and spoke.

Lord Prior of Brampton: NHS England does not hold this information. NHS England is not the responsible commissioner for all services in which the treatment of people with hepatitis is undertaken.

Hepatitis: Drugs

Lord Mancroft: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what is the breakdown of run rates assigned to each Operational Delivery Network for hepatitis C, broken down by hub and spoke.

Lord Prior of Brampton: Operational Delivery Networks (ODNs) lead organisations in collaboration with the local NHS England commissioning team are responsible for approving the organisations involved in the ODN. The ODN lead provider is responsible for working with its partners in determining how the patient numbers will be managed across its network. NHS England does not hold this information.

HIV Infection: Drugs

Baroness Gould of Potternewton: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what are the arrangements for assessing whether pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) should be nationally commissioned in England following the NHS England statement that they were withdrawing PrEP from consideration by them.

Lord Prior of Brampton: NHS England has agreed to carefully consider their position on commissioning Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP). Planning continues on the early implementer tests sites in the meantime. Irrespective of the commissioning arrangements for PrEP, decisions to fund will depend on full assessment of clinical and cost effectiveness and how it can be integrated with other HIV prevention efforts. The Government is investing £2.4 million in HIV prevention nationally and through this will fund a number of innovative local projects and set up a new HIV home sampling service - one of the first of its kind. National investment in home sampling has been significantly enhanced by local investment from local authorities.

HIV Infection: Drugs

Baroness Gould of Potternewton: To ask Her Majesty’s Government how many sexual health clinics will no longer be reimbursed by NHS England for the provision of post-exposure prophylaxis following the announcement by NHS England of its change of commissioning policy.

Baroness Gould of Potternewton: To ask Her Majesty’s Government why NHS England does not intend to reimburse some sexual health clinics for the provision of post-exposure prophylaxis.

Lord Prior of Brampton: NHS England has advised that it is not changing its commissioning policy in relation to post exposure prophylaxis after sexual exposure to HIV (PEPSE). However, NHS England is aiming to produce guidance to clarify how contractual arrangement for PEPSE can work in sexual health services that are no longer provided by the National Health Service and or have no experience of prescribing of antiretroviral drugs to enable appropriate levels of monitoring for quality and safety. NHS England remains committed to reimbursement for the appropriate use of PEPSE.

Contraceptives

Baroness Gould of Potternewton: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what steps they are taking to encourage health trusts to include (1) advice on and (2) access to postpartum contraception in maternity care contracts.

Baroness Gould of Potternewton: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what consideration they have given to increasing access to long-acting reversible contraception post-pregnancy as recommended in the 2014 Annual Report of the Chief Medical Officer, The Health of the 51%: Women, and in NICE guidelines on postnatal care.

Baroness Gould of Potternewton: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what is the status of Public Health England's Missed Opportunity Programme referenced in the 2014 Annual Report of the Chief Medical Officer, and whether they will place in the Library of the House any research findings related to that programme.

Lord Prior of Brampton: The Government’s Framework for Sexual Health Improvement in England sets out the need to increase access to all methods of contraception including long acting (LARC) methods and that better support is needed to access contraception after childbirth. Local authorities are mandated to provide access to the full range of contraception services and should work with clinical commissioning groups to ensure that contraception is discussed and all methods of contraception, including LARC, are accessible as part of the post-natal maternity pathway. Further guidance will be available in Public Health England’s Missed Opportunities in Pregnancy report. This addresses the missed opportunities for the provision of contraception along the maternity, abortion and early pregnancy loss pathways, and is now in the final stage of revisions and is expected to be published later in 2016.

Hepatitis

Lord Mancroft: To ask Her Majesty’s Government when NHS England expects to publish its operational framework for hepatitis C.

Lord Mancroft: To ask Her Majesty’s Government which current policy document or guidance, if any, specified a five-year rollout for the prioritised treatment of hepatitis C patients.

Lord Prior of Brampton: NHS England has already published its planning approach to implement National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) recommended treatment during 2016/17. NHS England has committed to produce an operational framework for hepatitis C during 2016/17. This will set out NHS England’s commitment to improving outcomes in hepatitis C across England. The publication date for the document has not been set but we anticipate work to continue during the late spring and early summer. NICE Technology Appraisals (TA) 363, 364 and 365 require Operational Delivery Networks to prioritise treatment for patients with the highest unmet clinical need. The National Health Service commitment to 10,000 treatments in 2016/17 reflects the multi-year modelling used by NICE and published in conjunction with the recommendations for TA 364. The NICE recommendations note that treatment decisions are influenced by clinical characteristics such as level of liver damage, genotype, treatment history and comorbidities. The recommendations also record the advice of clinical experts to the committee that a realistic estimate of patients accessing treatment each year is between 7-10,000.

Hepatitis: Drugs

Lord Mancroft: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what impact assessment they made of the introduction of CQUIN scheme BI1 Improving HCV Treatment Pathways through ODNs, and whether they will publish a copy of that assessment.

Lord Prior of Brampton: The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence specifically requires Operational Delivery Networks to prioritise hepatitis C patients on the basis of clinical need, as part of a progressive rollout of treatments over the next five years and the Commissioning for Quality and Innovation scheme (CQUIN) enables and ensures this take place. There is no separate assessment of impact. NHS England recognises that there is a very significant improvement in inequalities as a result of roll-out treatment for hepatitis C.

Hospitals: Consultants

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: To ask Her Majesty’s Government why there are no targets in the NHS for follow-up appointments after an initial consultant consultation.

Lord Prior of Brampton: The appropriate interval for follow up appointments will vary between different services or specialties, and between individual patients, depending on the severity of their condition. All follow up appointments (also known as planned, surveillance or recall appointments) should take place when clinically appropriate. NHS England’s guidance, Recording and reporting referral to treatment waiting times for consultant-led elective care is clear that when patients on planned lists are clinically ready for their care to commence and reach the date for their planned appointment they should either receive that appointment or be transferred to an active waiting list. At this point a waiting time clock will be started and their wait reported in the relevant statistical return. A copy of the guidance is attached.  



RTT Waiting Times
(PDF Document, 702.91 KB)

Learning Disability: Nurses

Lord Bradley: To ask Her Majesty’s Government which universities provide specific courses for learning disability nurses, and how many places on such courses were available at each university in each of the last five years.

Lord Prior of Brampton: The information by university is only available for the last three years and is given below:  University2013/142014/152015/16Northumbria University272828Teesside University505252University of Cumbria353535University of Salford262626University of Chester262626Edge Hill University262727Sheffield Hallam University242424University of Huddersfield252828University of Hull111515University of York182424De Montfort University132020University of Northampton203126University of Nottingham291616Birmingham City University353535Coventry University131313Keele University141414University of Wolverhampton232323University of East Anglia212121University of Hertfordshire717573University of West of England303030London South Bank University252732Kingston & St Georges University211820University of West London202022University of Greenwich203428Sum of above597662658 Source: HEE Local Education and Training Boards – local reports.

Choice in End of Life Care Review

Lord Wills: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the impact on people at the end of life of delaying the publication of their response to the Choice in end of life care review.

Lord Wills: To ask Her Majesty’s Government why they have not provided a specific date for when they will publish a response to the Choice in end of life care review, and why that response has not yet been published.

Lord Wills: To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether their formal response to the Choice in end of life care review will be published before the purdah period ahead of the EU referendum begins.

Lord Wills: To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they intend fully to fund measures to implement the recommendations set out in the Choice in end of life care review.

Lord Prior of Brampton: The Government recognises that the response to the Review of Choice in End of Life Care is keenly awaited. Ensuring that everyone at, or nearing, the end of life receives high quality, compassionate care, tailored to their individual needs and preferences is a priority for this Government, and the response to the Choice Review is therefore being carefully considered. As previously set out, in its response the Government will address each of the Review recommendations including: care coordination; improving the quality, availability and responsiveness of care; improving the quality and use of data; care planning and the use of digital care records; and the involvement of family members and carers in discussions about care. Further details regarding the publication of the response, which is expected shortly, will be made available when it is appropriate to do so.